The most important thing is to enjoy your life - to be happy - it's all that matters.

At Random

Chit-chat, current events

Moderators: Sue Sue Applegate, movieman1957, moira finnie, Lzcutter

jdb1

At Random

Postby jdb1 » March 30th, 2009, 1:21 pm

This is certainly a propos of nothing, but sometimes we really have to wonder why we bother at all, and wonder why we feel as though we're swimming upstream.

For example, I was walking along First Avenue at lunchtime today, and saw this little signboard in front of the video rental place:

"WE HAVE TWILIGHT. PUT DOWN THE BOOK. SEE THE MOVIE!"


To which I mentally added one of New York City's favorite mantras: "CLOSE YOUR MIND. OPEN YOUR WALLET."

User avatar
Birdy
Posts: 903
Joined: June 6th, 2007, 2:25 pm
Location: The Banks of the Wabash

Re: At Random

Postby Birdy » March 30th, 2009, 1:59 pm

As a librarian, I say, fine, see the movie.
It will only make you want to read the other 4 !
B
(Seriously, after filling up on McDonalds, what decision can you expect this country to make?)

And, by the way, I'm so jealous of your 'walking along 5th Avenue' I could be sick.
There is a tractor parked in front of the library as we speak.
B

klondike

Re: At Random

Postby klondike » March 30th, 2009, 2:17 pm

Dag-nabbit, Woman! :x
I go & spot this brand-new thread, authored by the very co-member who is undeniably the Jasper Jade to my Race Bannion, and so I come kickin' in here like Yosemite Sam with my six-guns drawn, ready to start up 9 yards o' fuss & hoopla . .
And I can't find nothin' to contend with ye about!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

What's up with that ?!!!!

jdb1

Re: At Random

Postby jdb1 » March 30th, 2009, 3:54 pm

klondike wrote:Dag-nabbit, Woman! :x
I go & spot this brand-new thread, authored by the very co-member who is undeniably the Jasper Jade to my Race Bannion, and so I come kickin' in here like Yosemite Sam with my six-guns drawn, ready to start up 9 yards o' fuss & hoopla . .
And I can't find nothin' to contend with ye about!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

What's up with that ?!!!!


Peace be wi' ye, my jo.

I'm sure we'll come up with something before very long.

Not that this has to be a funny sign thread, but I thought of another one I saw recently at a clothing store. To wit:

25% OFF ALL SERVICEMEN-WOMEN

It conjures up all sorts of interpretations, doesn't it?

User avatar
knitwit45
Posts: 4720
Joined: May 4th, 2007, 9:33 pm
Location: Gardner, KS

Re: At Random

Postby knitwit45 » March 30th, 2009, 6:39 pm

Baby Sale gives me the creeps. Fire sale.....where's my matches???? Yard sale...do you bring your own shovel? Garage sale... do I have to pay freight costs?

User avatar
srowley75
Posts: 731
Joined: April 22nd, 2008, 11:04 am
Location: West Virginia

Re: At Random

Postby srowley75 » March 31st, 2009, 8:57 am

jdb1 wrote:Not that this has to be a funny sign thread, but I thought of another one I saw recently at a clothing store. To wit:

25% OFF ALL SERVICEMEN-WOMEN

It conjures up all sorts of interpretations, doesn't it?


Oh, fun. This make me all weepy and nostalgic for Are You Being Served? and the staff of clothiers at Grace Bros, especially pompous Mrs. Slocombe's unintentional gaffes.

There's her testy note concerning the men's dept.: "Dear Sirs: Sales in the ladies' section could and would be improved by the removal of the men's trousers and underwear."

And her frustration with Mr. Grainger concerning where to put a perfume stand: "Are you suggesting, Mr. Grainger, that I should remove my underwear and put perfume there instead?"

And the constant remarks about the, er, cat.

-Stephen

jdb1

Re: At Random

Postby jdb1 » April 1st, 2009, 2:50 pm

This is part of the Associated Press description of the meeting among President and Mrs. Obama , Queen Elizabeth, and Prince Philip. See if you can figure out who was wearing what:

"Obama and his wife Michelle — wearing a black skirt, white shirt, pearls and a black coat — were two of the first dignitaries to meet the queen, wearing a salmon colored dress and her trademark pearls."

As far as I can determine, Pres. Obama was wearing two strands of pearls with two different outfits, one outfit black and one outfit salmon. And one of those sets of pearls belongs to the Queen. I suppose the other set belongs to Mrs. Obama, but from the sentence above, it's not clear that Mrs. Obama was the one wearing them. Or maybe both Mrs. and Mrs. Obama were sporting black skirts, white shirts, pearls and coats. Can't say for sure. The subject of the sentence, as it is structured, could be either "Obama" or "Obama and his wife Michelle."

This is giving me a headache.

User avatar
knitwit45
Posts: 4720
Joined: May 4th, 2007, 9:33 pm
Location: Gardner, KS

Re: At Random

Postby knitwit45 » April 1st, 2009, 3:08 pm

Judith, I would read the "-" after Michelle Obama's name as being like parentheses, and the following description, about her. After the description is another dash, like the closing parenthesis. After the queen and comma, the comma is like another parenthesis.

I know it's poorly written, what does that tell you, that I could so easily understand it? That most written words ARE poorly written.

User avatar
srowley75
Posts: 731
Joined: April 22nd, 2008, 11:04 am
Location: West Virginia

Sure looked strange to me

Postby srowley75 » April 1st, 2009, 3:28 pm

jdb1 wrote:This is part of the Associated Press description of the meeting among President and Mrs. Obama , Queen Elizabeth, and Prince Philip. See if you can figure out who was wearing what:

"Obama and his wife Michelle — wearing a black skirt, white shirt, pearls and a black coat — were two of the first dignitaries to meet the queen, wearing a salmon colored dress and her trademark pearls."


I just noticed that you can almost sing the words "black skirt, white shirt, pearls, and a black coat" to the tune of "Flying Purple People Eater." Which is semi-appropriate, given the image the story seems to be conjuring.

Not quite sure why the writer felt it necessary to try to cram all of that information into one sentence instead of two. It may be technically OK grammatically (I'd need to consult my style manual to be absolutely sure), but it doesn't read very well. It's too long and convoluted, especially for a news story.

-Stephen

User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8175
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: At Random

Postby moira finnie » April 1st, 2009, 4:02 pm

I'm sure that Barack never looked lovelier than he did when meeting the queen in that outfit with the pearls! Or was he the one wearing the salmon-colored dress? Darn! Now I have to watch the news tonight to see who wore what.

Thanks for the laugh, Stephen.
Avatar: Frank McHugh (1898-1981)

The Skeins
TCM Movie Morlocks

jdb1

Re: At Random

Postby jdb1 » April 1st, 2009, 4:12 pm

I'm sure that our President would look quite fetching in the skirt, blouse, dress and/or pearls. He's got the kind of form that wears any clothing well, don't you think?

Nancy, I think you're on to something here in mentioning parentheses. Parentheses would have worked better than the dashes to indicate who was being talked about, and those probably should have been inserted. Or I might have added ", who was" before each instance of the word "wearing." In any event, I agree as well with Stephen that there was an attempt here to try to cram too much information into a single sentence.

There was a time when we relied on journalists to write clear, brief and comprehensive prose. I guess those days are over, considering the state of liberal arts in American universities.

User avatar
ChiO
Posts: 3924
Joined: January 2nd, 2008, 1:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: At Random

Postby ChiO » April 1st, 2009, 6:17 pm

This is part of the Associated Press description of the meeting among President and Mrs. Obama , Queen Elizabeth, and Prince Philip. See if you can figure out who was wearing what:

"Obama and his wife Michelle — wearing a black skirt, white shirt, pearls and a black coat — were two of the first dignitaries to meet the queen, wearing a salmon colored dress and her trademark pearls."


Would I be correct in assuming, then, that Prince Philip was not wearing anything? Greek blood does tell.
Everyday people...that's what's wrong with the world. -- Morgan Morgan
I love movies. But don't get me wrong. I hate Hollywood. -- Orson Welles
Movies can only go forward in spite of the motion picture industry. -- Orson Welles

jdb1

Re: At Random

Postby jdb1 » April 2nd, 2009, 8:44 am

ChiO wrote:
This is part of the Associated Press description of the meeting among President and Mrs. Obama , Queen Elizabeth, and Prince Philip. See if you can figure out who was wearing what:

"Obama and his wife Michelle — wearing a black skirt, white shirt, pearls and a black coat — were two of the first dignitaries to meet the queen, wearing a salmon colored dress and her trademark pearls."


Would I be correct in assuming, then, that Prince Philip was not wearing anything? Greek blood does tell.


Ah, but Chi-O-O-O, although Philip's family occupied the throne of Greece, they were not Greek, but Danish. I imagine HRH was in his workshop, sanding a small teakwood table for Her Maj to keep her ciggies in.

And by the way, I thought it was well-known among Royal-watchers that the Queen owns an iPod, and uses it enthusiastically. So why was Fox News getting so tied in knots about the Obamas' customized iPod gift? I thought it was perfectly appropriate, and rather thoughtful. For pity's sake, the woman is over 80 -- what were they going to give her -- capri pants? baseball bats? Gee, I guess Fox News just didn't think it through, or bother to research it --- what a surprise.

User avatar
ChiO
Posts: 3924
Joined: January 2nd, 2008, 1:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: At Random

Postby ChiO » April 2nd, 2009, 1:06 pm

although Philip's family occupied the throne of Greece, they were not Greek, but Danish.


I'll ask Mrs. ChiO. If true (and I know you, as a faithful Brooklynite Royal-watcher, would never mislead me), first she'll deny it, then be disappointed, and then say, "Better a Dane than a Turk."

And speaking of Danes, I received the following from our son-in-law yesterday:

Subject: Netflix mystery
Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 3:29 PM

So I was just looking at the “Movies you’ll love” tab on Netflix and it recommended (quite correctly) The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928). Then it says the reason is because we liked the following three movies:

M

Annie Hall

Spinal Tap

M + Annie Hall + Spinal Tap = Passion of Joan of Arc? What am I missing here????


My response:

M = European film from '30s with Expressionist tones
Annie Hall = the tribulations of a woman
Spinal Tap = when Jeanne d'arc is tied to the stake, isn't the fire turned up to 11?
Try my next two favorite Dreyer films: Ordet and Day of Wrath. Or, maybe, Rock 'n' Roll High School.


Any other explanation?
Everyday people...that's what's wrong with the world. -- Morgan Morgan
I love movies. But don't get me wrong. I hate Hollywood. -- Orson Welles
Movies can only go forward in spite of the motion picture industry. -- Orson Welles

User avatar
MichiganJ
Posts: 1406
Joined: May 20th, 2008, 4:37 pm
Contact:

Re: At Random

Postby MichiganJ » April 2nd, 2009, 1:35 pm

How about the two saints? Saint Joan and David St. Hubbins (the patron saint of quality footwear.)
"Let's be independent together." Dr. Hermey DDS


Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest